Some people believe that organic food should be affordable for everyone, while others argue that its higher price is justified by its health and environmental benefits. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
This IELTS Writing Task 2 answer was marked Band 6 on the four official criteria. All four criteria were marked at 6. The biggest single improvement: Address both sides of the question explicitly: explain why organic food may cost more because of production and environmental benefits, then justify your position that essential healthy choices should nevertheless be affordable.
How it was marked
| Criterion | Band | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Task Response | 6 | The position is clear in statements such as "I firmly believe" and the conclusion supports more affordable organic food, but the response does not sufficiently discuss the opposing view that a higher price is justified by health and environmental benefits. The main ideas about low-income access are relevant, but they are developed with general claims rather than specific explanation or evidence. |
| Lexical Resource | 6 | The essay uses an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including "organic food", "low-income families", "financial stress" and "governmental policies", but it relies heavily on repeated words such as "healthy", "food", "affordable" and "individuals". Some word choices are imprecise or unnatural, and the spelling error in "adavantages" prevents a higher score. |
| Grammatical Range & Accuracy | 6 | The essay uses a reasonable mixture of simple and complex structures, including concessive clauses in "although the cost of organic food should be considered" and relative clauses such as "which can have a positive effect". Meaning is generally clear, but some clause construction and reference are awkward, especially in "people need to have more healthy food choices which should be sold" and "some people who are used to consuming organic food could improve their health which can have". |
| Coherence & Cohesion | 6 | The essay has a clear four-paragraph structure, with the introduction presenting a position, two body paragraphs giving perspectives, and a conclusion. However, progression is somewhat repetitive and mechanical, with links such as "As a result" and "Consequently" often connecting broad claims rather than showing precise logical relationships. |
The answer
A learner answer, not a model answer — study what the marks reward, don't copy it.
Corrections from the marking
adavantages
advantages
The word is misspelled; the correct spelling is "advantages".
to both health and the environment
for both human health and the environment
"Benefits for human health and the environment" is the more natural and precise collocation.
For example, some people who are used to consuming organic food could improve their health which can have a positive effect on their well-being.
For example, some people who are used to consuming organic food could improve their health, which can have a positive effect on their well-being.
A comma is needed before the non-defining relative clause because it adds extra information about the improvement in health.
How this answer could score higher
- Address both sides of the question explicitly: explain why organic food may cost more because of production and environmental benefits, then justify your position that essential healthy choices should nevertheless be affordable.
- Develop each body paragraph with a specific cause-and-effect explanation rather than broad claims such as "Consuming healthy food plays a vital role in this society"; link affordability to concrete effects on low-income households and public health.
- Improve sentence control by rewriting awkward relative-clause chains such as "which should be sold" and "which can have a positive effect" into shorter, clearer sentences with unambiguous references.
Other answers to this question
Write your own answer to this question
Is this your essay? Request removal. Essays are published without any name, email or account details.